Repeat DWI Offender Gets 10 Years' Probation for Crash Injuring Family
Cruz Guerra Nolasco was sentenced to 10 years' probation after running a red light and injuring a family, according to abc13.com.
2 reports on this incident · first at Aug 21, 2026, 10:15 p.m. ET
This case is not concluded. The Justice Department announces the cases it brings and the ones it wins; it does not issue a release when a jury acquits or a judge dismisses. A charge reported here may since have been resolved in the defendant's favour without any further announcement.
We last searched for new coverage of this at Aug 21, 2026, 10:39 p.m. ET — checked 1h ago.
Earlier reports
Aug 21, 2026, 10:15 p.m. ETFirst report
Repeat DWI Offender Sentenced to Probation for Crash Injuring Family
On August 22, 2026, Cruz Guerra Nolasco was sentenced to 10 years' probation in connection with a crash that injured a family, according to abc13.com. Nolasco had been charged with DWI after allegedly running a red light and slamming into the family's vehicle.
The sentencing was reported by abc13.com, which noted that Nolasco is a repeat DWI offender. The specific details of the crash and the injuries sustained by the family were not detailed in the report.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 122 Aug 2026, 02:15current
First published.
- Version 122 Aug 2026, 02:22current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.